‘Seven expert witnesses who fabricated evidence about the cost of replacement hire cars for motorists in road crashes have been jailed.’
The Guardian, 16th June 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Bakery group Greggs and the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy have withdrawn their appeals over a High Court ruling that incorrect advice had been given under the ‘Primary Authority’ scheme.’
Local Government Lawyer, 16th June 2017
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Sex abuse victims have been “utterly marginalised” by an inquiry set up to help them, one of the victims claimed.’
BBC News, 17th June 2017
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Criminal investigation into the Grenfell Tower tragedy is looking into manslaughter charges, Sir Keir Starmer has said.’
Daily Telegraph, 18th June 2017
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘There will be no Queen’s Speech next year to give MPs more time to deal with Brexit laws, the government says.’
BBC News, 18th June 2017
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘R (Kiarie) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (Byndloss) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] UKSC 42. The Government’s flagship scheme to deport foreign criminals first and hear their appeals later was ruled by the Supreme Court to be incompatible with the appellants’ right to respect for their private and family life.’
UK Human Rights Blog, June 15th 2017
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Today marks 6 years since the UN Human Rights Council adopted the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. To celebrate, we are looking at three fantastic things the UK has done to ensure that businesses respect human rights, and two areas where it could vastly improve.’
Rightsinfo, 16th June 2017
Source: rightsinfo.org
‘It used to be thought that in exercising a contractual discretion accorded to it, in relation for example to a bonus or a share plan, an employer could, so long as it addressed the matter honestly and genuinely, make subjective qualitative judgments which would only be reviewable if they were perverse or illogical. Braganza appears to have changed this.’
Employment Law Blog, 12th June 2017
Source: employment11kbw.com
‘After significant controversy and substantial amendments, the Children and Social Work Act 2017 received royal assent on 27 April. While the majority of the legislation is not yet in force, the changes contained in the Act will have important implications for the regulation of social work in England, safeguarding of children, and investigations into the death of children. In addition, the Act clarifies and amends the obligations of local authorities as corporate parents.’
Community Care Blog, 14th June 2017
Source: communitycare11kbw.com
‘A muslim man with severe learning difficulties need not observe the Ramadan fast or be shaved in accordance with religious practice, a Court of Protection judge has ruled.’
Local Government Lawyer, 15th June 2017
Source: localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Harlow Borough Council and Essex County Council have secured a three-year extension to an injunction which bans Travellers from setting up unauthorised encampments across Harlow.’
Local Government Lawyer, 15th June 2017
Source: localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Many law schools are teaching law “as it was in the 1970s”, Professor Richard Susskind, IT adviser to the Lord Chancellor, has said.’
Legal Futures, 16th June 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Three Polish nationals have today (14 June) been sentenced for modern slavery offences, after they trafficked workers to the UK and forced them to live in poverty and fear.’
Crown Prosecution Service, 14th June 2017
Source: www.cps.gov.uk
Supreme Court
A and B, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Health [2017] UKSC 41 (14 June 2017)
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
UKI (Kingsway) Ltd v Westminster City Council [2017] EWCA Civ 430 (15 June 2017)
Dexia Crediop SPA v Comune Di Prato [2017] EWCA Civ 428 (15 June 2017)
High Court (Administrative Court)
Nduka v General Medical Council [2017] EWHC 1396 (Admin) (15 June 2017)
Court (Chancery Division)
Byrne v Mullan [2017] EWHC 1387 (Ch) (15 June 2017)
High Court (Commercial Court)
Micula & Ors v Romania [2017] EWHC 1430 (Comm) (15 June 2017)
High Court (Technology and Construction Court)
Alstom Transport UK Ltd v London Underground Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 1406 (TCC) (15 June 2017)
‘Two prisoners who escaped a London jail by sawing through a metal bar, clambering over the roof and swinging around a CCTV pole using a bedsheet have had their sentences extended. James Whitlock, 32, and Matthew Baker, 29, went on the run in November last year after breaking out of HMP Pentonville. Staff at the jail did not realise they were gone until 15 hours after they were last seen in their cell.’
The Guardian, 15th June 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Up to 250,000 people drop off the radar and end up as illegal immigrants in Britain every year, according to secret Home Office figures, amid warnings that border controls are completely ineffective and will only get worse after Brexit. David Wood, who was head of immigration enforcement at the Home Office until 2015, said that more than 1.2million illegal immigrants are currently living in Britain, predominantly after overstaying their visas.’
Daily Telegraph, 16th June 2017
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
F v L (Child Arrangements Order: Relocation)[2017] EWHC 1377 (Fam)
‘The mother, an Italian national, sought a child arrangements order (“CAO”) under section 8 of the Children Act 1989, as amended, in respect of the child, aged five, and permission to relocate with him to Italy, alleging serious domestic abuse by the father. The Italian father opposed the application for relocation and cross-applied for a shared care CAO. Despite the recommendation in the report prepared by the CAFCASS officer that the child’s main carer be his mother and that she should be given permission to relocate to Italy, the trial judge decided not to consider or make any finding in respect of the abuse allegations, refused the mother’s application to relocate and ordered the continuance of the shared care regime. The mother appealed on the grounds, inter alia, that the trial judge had made a fundamental procedural error in failing to resolve the issue of the future care of the child prior to considering the application for relocation and had failed to make findings on the abuse allegations.’
WLR Daily, 9th June 2017
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The first defendant in the first of two claims entered into a licence with the claimant in respect of a portfolio of patents, including a US patent, concerning tocilizumab, an immunosuppressive drug. The claimant sought, inter alia, a declaration that it was not obliged to continue to pay royalties under the licence in respect of its tocilizumab products. The defendants alleged that, although framed as a claim for a declaration relating to a contract, a part of the proceedings, in substance, concerned not only the scope but also the validity of the US patent. Accordingly, consideration of the claim would infringe the territorial limits of the courts jurisdictional powers and constitute an affront to comity (“the Moçambique rule”) and/or the foreign act of state doctrine, which militated against the English court determining issues relating to sovereign acts of a foreign state.’
WLR Daily, 26th May 2017
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
In re Gard (A Child) (Child on Life Support: Withdrawal of Treatment)[2017] EWCA Civ 410
‘C, a child aged nine months, suffered from a rare inherited mitochondrial disease which led to dysfunction of several of his organ systems. His condition had progressed since his birth resulting in irreversible brain damage and an inability to move his arms or legs or to breathe unaided. His life expectancy was measured in months. His parents sought to obtain an alternative treatment, known as nucleoside therapy, that was available in the United States of America. The NHS trust which ran the hospital where C was treated applied pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction of the court for declarations that it was lawful and in C’s best interests for his artificial ventilation to be withdrawn, for his treating clinicians to provide him with palliative care only, and for him not to undergo nucleoside therapy. The judge granted the application and made the declarations sought, finding that the body of experienced medical opinion available to him, save for the doctor offering the nucleoside therapy, was unanimous to the effect that the prospect of nucleoside therapy having any benefit was effectively zero and would be futile. C’s parents sought permission to appeal on the grounds that (i) where parents put forward a viable treatment option for their child, that option could only be overriden by the court if it was established that the pursuit of that option was likely to cause the child to suffer “significant harm”, and the usual “best interests” test did not apply; and (ii) the judge had no jurisdiction to grant an order on the application of one clinical team preventing a second clinical team from carrying out a treatment that the latter had offered in the reasonable exercise of its professional judgment.’
WLR Daily, 24th May 2017
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024